|From: Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net |X-Accept-Language: en-us |Sender: wikipedia-l-admin@wikipedia.org |Reply-To: wikipedia-l@wikipedia.org |Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 14:52:06 -0800 | |Oliver Pereira wrote: | |>Is there an agreed definition of what is or is not a "minor edit"? I |>haven't been able to find one, so I've just been guessing. I suspect that |>most people are just guessing. So if it's such a big deal to people, |>perhaps there should be clearer guidelines on what should or should not be |>marked as a minor edit. Perhaps the "minor edit" box should have a link by |>it, with the text "What is a minor edit?", linking to a page of such |>guidelines. |> |I shudder at the thought of having yet another rule. Ultimately, |people's common sense should prevail. If I'm reviewing changes to an |article that interests me as an editor, I'll look at all the changes |both major and minor. If I'm reviewing it as a reader, I'll stick to |the major changes. | |Eclecticology | |
If you don't think it's worth anyone's while to know about the edit, it's minor.
Tom P. O88